Wednesday, 13 May 2009

Our Dying Sun

Our Sun is in it's death throes. We are right now on the brink of disaster.

Is that news to you? If you only get your science from the mainstream media and "science" institutes then I bet it is news to you. The alarmist media of course completely ignores real science favoring the lie and alarmism of manmade global warming. For everyone who has been getting their science from the blogosphere the dying sun is not news at all. Blog scientists throughout the internet have been informing people for years about the imminent solar collapse.

Here's a recap summary: Solar output has been slowly winding down for the last few years. Everyone thought it would start winding up again in 2007 (except blog scientists who called it correctly), but it defied so-called "expert" predictions and continued ever downwards. The current situation is that the Sun's output is still falling dramatically. We face the worrying prospect that this decline will not stop and perhaps might speed up. The signs are indeed growing more clear that we have already entered a long and terrifyingly deep maunder-like minimum. The last time that happened we had an actual ice age. The only question now is how low can solar output go and how many millions might die.

Tens of millions? In fact if cooling does continue we might very well see a massive shortfall in food supplies and hundreds of millions could die. Plague and disease would once again spread through populations with cold-weakened immune systems. Many species could be wiped out entirely.

What is the IPCC and Al Gore doing about the risk of imminent catastrophic cooling?

Nothing. That's right, the political body charged with monitoring the climate (however corrupt) and Al Gore are doing absolutely nothing about the worrying solar signs we are seeing. Obviously Al Gore will do just fine in an ice age as he hypocritically owns a fleet of large jets and cargo planes which he can use to fly safely above any ice age zone. In fact he doesn't even need to do that if reports about his house are true - a mansion so big and pumped with so much coal based electricity (hypocrite!) that it will be warm even in an ice age. During the ice age he will surely sit in there comfortably as orphans starve outside through ice frosted windows.

Indeed because they know they are immune from the effects of an ice age, the IPCC and Al Gore continue to push the fraud that life-giving co2 is heating the Earth up catastrophically. Even though the Earth has been cooling since 1979*. Warmists continue to pump alarmism through the mainstream media and make ridiculously over exagerated statements about the future of the climate to scare the public. They exagerate stories of future temperature changes of a few tenths of a degree (not even real degrees) into some kind of massive death furnace.

Remember - if it's fearmongering it ain't science. True scientists remain level headed in the face of experimental data and facts. They don't get all emotional and start crying about the end of the world. Alarmists - those who exagerate and fabricate terrifying scenarios - do so for one reason: to sell you a "solution" to the "problem", the solution being something that profits them. You often have to wade through all their alarmist diatribe to discover their ulterior motive which they let slip at the end when they try and sell you their pet "solution".

But this is all beside the point - what can we do about the upcoming solar collapse? Obviously we can't prevent it. No the first step to dealing with cooling is obviously to stop any tax increases. Any increases in tax at this point will make it almost impossible to actually survive the impending ice age. So lobby your representatives now to prevent any tax increases and to lower existing rates. That is if you care about your children's future. Do you?Note: Due to the nature of the threat I felt obliged to 'rush to print' this dire warning about taxation. The planned post based on my upcoming paper 'A Brief History Of Climate Modelling' will follow shortly. As a teaser here is a useful schematic I stumbled across on google images. it documents a long history of green subterfuge and conspiracy. My research has found this document to be largely accurate and to the point.

133 comments:

I don't want to be alarmist, but is the death spiral in solar output also causing the atmosphere to shrink?

A genetics professor, writing in The Telegraph, in an article called "Where have all the sunspots gone?" says that because the sun is dying, "the atmosphere now ends – and the void begins – about 250 miles above our heads; which is far less than its average of around 400 miles. For all of us, space is a lot closer than it was at the start of the Space Age."Since it is absolute zero in outer space, if we move outer space 150 miles closer to earth, wouldn't that tend to cool things down a bit as well?

And your right, iNFERNO, ONLY MADMEN WOUuld raise taxes with a doomed sun!

Just today on WUWT (Inferno, great blog scientists think alike!), David Deming posted on the general issue of the quiet sun. His historical account should be a warning to us all:

"In northern Europe, the Little Ice Age kicked off with the Great Famine of 1315. Crops failed due to cold temperatures and incessant rain. Desperate and starving, parents ate their children, and people dug up corpses from graves for food. In jails, inmates instantly set upon new prisoners and ate them alive."

No, your eyes do not deceive you, that is an exact quote; a cut-n-paste in fact. We may well be in for a period where "parents [eat] their children" and "people dig up corpses from graves for food."

Thanks heavens Deming cut through the alarmist warming religion to bring us clear-headed worries based on real and relevant experience!

Oh my gog, I never new.I've canceled my subscription to New Scientist. Since they haven't covered this incredible research they must have a some sort of secret "agenda". Obviously to use my cash for alarmist purposes and gain control of the government so they can tax me into oblivion.

Well, I had heard something about this, but I had no idea just how serious this was. We should begin looking into geoengineering schemes that might help us adapt to such a problem, maybe mirrors in space to direct more sunlight to Earth?

We should also more thoroughly catalogue the brave souls warning us of the impending ice age, because nothing angers me more than the "no-one could have known" excuse making that goes along with every crisis it seems -- we need the full list so at least we can proudly pull their names out when they're proven right and rub it in the Goreistas' faces. We have Inferno and Deming, who are some of the other notable Cassandras we need to start paying attention to?

You couple a dying sun with that Maunder super thing with a magnetic reversal or two, some serious carbon emission cuts (thanks Al and associated commies!) and WHAM-O, it's freeze-out city padre. Talk about your tripping points, that there would be the mother of all of 'em. Don't give your winter coat to the Goodwill just yet, and start stocking up on canned goods.

A brilliant analysis as always. I think it is a well established fact that all the Warmist propaganda promoted by Algore and his socialist minions is just a scheme to tax us all into oblivion thereby laying the groundwork for a new Stalinist world order. Nevertheless one rarely sees scientific articles that address the taxation ramifications of all these predictions about the climate. You truly nailed the horse to the camel's back with this article!

BTW: have you seen the "theory" that suggests that dying stars actually grow physically larger - and turn red no less - toward the end of their life cycles? According to this "theory" if the Sun were really dying it would grow large enough to envelop the entire Earth. Obviously a load of tripe as this article makes clear.

Algore and his communist legions will stop at nothing to increase any and every tax until all freedom-loving people are so impoverished that a new Stalinist dictatorship will seem the only answer. Since "climate change" is the excuse being tendered to advance their agenda, we desperately need many more rigorous blog scientists out there to debunk their hateful propaganda. The future of freedom and the free market depends on it!

' The present technology of nuclear power, based on the nuclear fission of uranium and thorium, would secure heat and electricity supplies for 5 billion people for about 10,000 years. At the same time, the stock of hydrogen in the ocean for future fusion-based reactors would suffice for 6 billion years. Our cities, industrial plants, food-producing greenhouses, our livestock, and also zoos and botanical gardens turned into greenhouses, could be heated virtually forever, and we could survive, together with many other organisms, on a planet that had turned into a gigantic glacier '

So it seems alarmist talk of mass famine and death due to the imminent ice age is unfounded in the actual applied science, and we can all relax. Truly when the history of this AGW delusion comes to be written, Jaworowski and Larouche will be feted as scientific collossi.

In a guest post he rams home the message that a warm Arctic is nothing new with a devastating graph comparing a pair of days one from 1958, one from 2009 showing no change. He then shows the plot from a GISTEMP station illustrating the balmy warmth of the Arctic back in the day.

Regrettably, the station he picked in S Greenland is at 64N and so technically outside the Arctic Circle. Someone hould tell him before the warmist trolls stomp all over him. It is exactly this sort of sloppiness that made me switch my allegience to this blog, where accuracy and precision are our watchwords.

BTW The most Northerly station with good data history is Eureka which makes the point nearly as well, if you have the right sort of eyes.

You dismissed the "theory" that stars turn into red giants. Normally I'd agree, for as I can tell from your confident diction you're a climate scientist, but take a look at the picture of the sun that Inferno posted. It looks pretty red, or reddish to me... I'm sure this was just taken a few days ago. It all fits together: sun dying, turning red, perhaps getting larger.

Now, I don't want to look directly at the sun myself (quiet though it is) in case I damage my retinas, so I'll rely on the latest blog-scientific evidence like Inferno's picture. And take a close look at the cloud patterns in the background - to me they resemble Voyager's close-ups of Jupiter. Could Jupiter also be getting closer to Earth?

Excuse my wordiness, but since we are discussing the sun I must say all this.

We all know the ice cores have conclusively shown that temperature always leads CO2 by exactly 800 years. Because of how Blog Science has established this as proof that CO2 cannot cause warming, I worry that the warmunistas are thus refusing to examine the true driver of climate change (besides cosmic rays and other only natural driver), the SUN.

As we in the Blog Science brigade know, the alarminati control the purse strings when it comes to climate research money. They spout their end-of-the-world rants because it keeps them literally rolling in the vast sums of research grant money. Of course Blog Science can do _almost_ any science, but... I know some will think the socialheatists have partially brainwashed me, but please hear me out.

Blog Science allows anyone to add their opinion to the body of knowledge thus making that body of knowledge more correct and more certain (allowing of course for the deletion of the wrong opinions from those who hate plants having food in the atmosphere). But as the literally dozens of incriminating photos of surface temperature measurement sites has proven, sometimes field work is necessary to supplement Blog Science. Whether it is road trips to thermometers, hikes to old rings of trees or whatever, or demands that the Hansenites turn over computer code and ice cores, sometimes Blog Science still requires rolling up one's sleeves and getting one's hands a bit dirty.

Again, we know how devastating the ice cores have been to the Church of Gore. The work that has not been done that I believe would be the final cough in the nailing of "global warming" is SOLAR CORES. However unlike the ice cores this work has not yet been done, obviously because the powers-that-be (for now) know it would blow apart the last remnants of the idea of humans causing climate change.

I am not sure of exactly how the mission would go to retrieve the solar cores. But I know Blog Science can quickly determine all the details like whether the mission should be robotic or manned (but not "Mann"ed because then it would return not with solar cores but hockey sticks!). I suspect if we could just properly tax at the appropriate flat tax rate all the kickbacks and such that the IPCC brigade receive we could have more than enough money to pay for the mission. The tricky part is forcing the mission to happen with the greenhouse gaspers controlling so much of climate research, NASA, etc (the old dying science that still gets most of the money and rockets).

Yet then when the mission blasts off then returns, Blog Science can audit the solar cores and compare them side-by-side to the ice cores. I know it will be so obvious with all the layers lining up so clearly. The ends of the records will showing the current dying sun and the current cooling Earth. I learned online it takes 8.5 minutes for the sun's light to reach Earth, so I suspect we will see layers with sunspots in the solar cores leading the colder layers in the ice cores by 8.5 minutes. Or would it be the warmer layers in the ice cores? I forget, but it does not matter because the solar cores will be (further) proving humans cannot cause climate to change.

I hope the rest of Blog Science will not begrudge me if I constantly wave this banner for solar cores and will indeed support and push for this mission. Inferno proving here that the sun is going out further demonstrates how critical it is. Most importantly, we may not see another tax cut until this mission occurs and topples the Goracle once and for all!

Now that we know that we will be saved from the disastrous fading of the sun by nuclear power, we can breath a sigh of relief.

Meanwhile, over at Jenny's blog, Michael Hammer has just proved with his Excel climate model that to reach an increase of 3 degrees C by 2070 would require a water wapour feedback which corresponds to 1.9 degrees of additional warming for each 1 degree. And of course, those additional 1.9 degrees would in turn cause a warming by 1.9*1.9=3.61 degrees and so on. That is, such a feedback would result in a fast runaway warming, until all water in the oceans had been turned into water vapour.So elegant: disproving global warming alarmism by using climate models. Pure genius!

Reporting from the UK, I can confirm that some parents are already eating their children whilst people dig up corpses for food. This is as a direct result of stalinist taxation measures driven by the alarmist neo-fascist bed-wetters. When the sun dies I doubt there will be any children left to eat, then it will be each man for himself in the fight over immigrant food supplies.

Re "The most Northerly station with good data history is Eureka":Don't be fooled by warmist data manipulation. Any eight-year-old can see that the data clearly proves that air-conditioning was installed at the site in 1970.

I'm sorry to disagree, chek, but I feel you're suggesting a step too far. It's entirely reasonable to be suspicious of recent solar manipulation, but what I think we need is to develop the smart technology that would allow its orbit to be properly controlled by free market forces. JMV, of course.

I saw the new Star Trek film recently because I heard that there was something about a supernova which I thought could show me something related to solar cores. "Supernova" means a star gets like broken or something. Maybe that is what is happening to the sun! It is too bad we do not know for sure.

Anyway, you may know that "StarFleet" is based in San Francisco and thus think that the movie is nothing but leftist, warmmonger propoganda. But actually that is not true - I would say in many ways quite the contrary even!

Many who would not have considered it may now actually go see it because of that, so I will try to make a point to not give away any spoilers. But if one wants to take no chances and read this after seeing the movie or read it now but not comprehend it for a while, I will understand.

First the movie shows that the future a couple hundred years from now will not be hot on Earth. (It is not cold either so obviously we will find a solution to revive the sun. Nukes sound promising!) The future climate seems quite fine actually. In fact, men wear long sleeves everywhere, including outside. Many women wear short skirts, but that is obviously for fashion and not out of a need to keep cool. And you should see what they grow in Iowa in the future!

Meanwhile the planet where Spock grows up is a rocky wasteland. Judging from the "old science" ways of that planet, they must have gone the carbon tax route and taken all the life-giving CO2 away thus killing all the plants, which they could not replace apparently because taxes were too high to afford it.

On another planet there is ice everywhere in spite of at least a couple people working there. That pretty well shows how CO2 cannot cause warming.

Not to give too much away, but the bad guy threatens Earth with a weapon that is RED! Obviously that shows how dangerous the communist ideas of trying to cut greenhouse gases and raising taxes are.

As for information toward gathering solar cores, let's just say that for being called "Star Trek" there was not much to do with stars. Sort of like how "global warming" does not have warming, I guess! Anyway, with a space ship like the Enterprise they had in the movie then gathering solar cores would be easy. I heard online that the first Space Shuttle was called Enterprise, so we could probably use that for the solar cores mission if the IPCC and GISS will just open up and provide it and tell how to fly it.

This "red giant" theory (and it is just that, a theory!) is based entirely on "computer models". Just look outside at night. There are hardly any red stars out there, and the ones that are there are no bigger than all the rest. Everyone knows when things get cold the get white and frosty, why should it be any different for a star? It is not.

Surely the free market will solve this sun problem (assuming capitalism is not destroyed). But since we are mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren, we might as well apply some of those billions to a solar bailout. After all, since many plants need its light the sun is almost as important as banks and SUVs. A sun stimulus plan might be one worth supporting.

There was a movie a while ago called 'Sunshine' in which a group of bed-wetting warmists, alarmed at the present cooling trend, decide to go and reheat the sun with a nuke bigger than Algore's butt.IIRC, they all died.

Note that Michael Hammer and I are NOT related. Given that Hammer is not a terribly common name, this just goes to show that having two Hammers as anti-AGW blog scientists mentioned on just ONE blog is pretty telling evidence of just how strong the anti-AGW science basis is. Now that's what I call puttin' the Hammer down!

Take no notice of me - I was just being grouchy from a round with intransigent warmists mocking Marc Morono's appearance on the Alex Jones show. How can they dismiss as lies such blatant in-your-face truth? Like their "facts" mean anything, let alone trump the truth.

Well, that and the uncaring hearts of women. You offer them your everything and they are still somehow able to pretend nothing happened and act as if you didn't exist.

I'm firmly convinced that in some distant future when warming is actually occurring for real - say the sun goes supernova or something - we'll be able to combat it by gathering together womankind into a large crowd and letting their cold, dark hearts absorb the excess heat.

Chek... you reckon Denial Depot and Anthony Watts' limp organ are in the same league? I beg to differ, but in the spirit of fraternal solidarity, and for information, I just inserted the following into Anthony's intray. We'll see how things pan out...

Well, over on Denial Depot we were considering awarding Mr Goddard a Blog Science Doctorate. However he has kind of blotted his copy book, so to speak. Here he considers a mere photo caption as worthy of a whole 'rapid rebuttal' post, even when the same publication is quite clear ...

The Catlin Arctic Survey's original mission to take measurements right up to the North Pole has not worked out though. They will be picked up 490km from the pole, less than half way there.Look, we’re all on the same side here, fighting the good fight agianst the phoney psuedoscientific alarmist alarmism of the IPCC and the Gore-ist UN socialist bedwetters and their tax-imposing agenda, but nitpicking over photo captions is not going to help the cause one jot. Surely the bandwidth taken up by this post would have been better expended on a photo of a weather station next to a barbecue?

@ PhilYou may have misread something somewhere because I certainly can't recall comparing DD with Professor Whats' stalwart organ. Granted, it may not be right up there with DD which I sometimes liken to the blog His Most Excellency Lord Monkerton would have if he wasn't so busy with his original research.

Thanks for the Catlin Survey tip which I hadn't seen before. After a little googling, it appears that unofficially the story is that they had to abandon the mission due to concerted and repeated attacks by massed formations of polar bears.

It couldn't be any more ironic unless Algore was an expedition member and had had to take refuge on an ice floe.

Whatever. I'll give you another reason that WUWT is fast losing its grip lead in the race for the denialist / rationalist blog audience. Making the same mistakes over and over, sadly. But at least they're not as bad as George Monbiot, Anthony's quote of the week highlights the Moonbat's latest bullseye ... on his own foot! Monbiot's biggest mistake, of course, was to admit the error and apologise promptly in a desparate bid to recover some of his terminally damaged credibility. This is wrong, on making a minor factual error, (or two), one correct course of action is what we may call the 'Booker' manoevre, ie maintain a dignified silence, ignore any mere quibbles of 'fact' and leave your stuff in situ so that the core message may still come over. Another approach that works is just to remove the post and pretend it never existed; we'll call this the 'Watts' strategem.

So if, for example you post a boneheaded comparison of the four major temperature series without understanding that the numbers are from different baselines, you simply do this...

Here is a list of April Global Temperature Anomalies for all four major datasets:

NCDC 0.605 °CGISS 0.440 °CRSS 0.202 °CUAH 0.091 °C

It is quite a spread, a whole 0.514°C difference between the highest (NCDC) and the lowest (UAH), and a 0.165°C difference now between GISS and NCDC. As Watts did today. The anomalies are from different baselines you dunderhead... Duh! Of course it saddens me to see such a leading light of the rationalist movement repeat the same error, on the other hand I am sure he will simply quietly remove the post after a decent interval, on the third hand, in a sane world there is no way such an error-strewn blog could win any kind of 'Science' Prize, and this leaves the way clear for Denial Depot, where we only serve up the finest fact-checked and web-reviewed Blog Science, to scoop next year's Science Blog of the Year. Let's Go!.

re Catlin and Polar Bears:As if the Catlin "Survey" wasn't already a scientific laughingstock, it turns out that they were done in by polar bears? Now that's funny. Didn't they do research on the multi-decadal PBO (Polar Bear Oscillation) before they left??

Phil wrote: So if, for example you post a boneheaded comparison of the four major temperature series without understanding that the numbers are from different baselines, you simply do this...The different temperature records have different base lines? They cannot even agree about the base line? Amazing! That is conclusive evidence that the temperature record cannot be trusted!

Yet another nail in the humungous coffin of the global warming alarmist scam.

What is fascinating about the Darwinians is their inability to accept just how much they do not know. Armoured in their certainty that they have all the answers when they so obviously don’t, neo-Darwinians such as Richard Dawkins rest their beliefs just as much on an unscientific leap of faith as the â Creationists’ they so fanatically affect to despise. It is revealing how they dismissively try to equate all those scientists who argue for 'intelligent design' with Biblical fundamentalists, as their only way to cope with questions they cannot answer.

Something strikingly similar has been taking place over the belief that the world is dangerously warming, due to the rise in man-made CO2. For a time the believers in this theory seemed to have the evidence on their side, as CO2 levels and temperatures rose in apparent harmony. But lately all sorts of evidence has been put forward by serious scientists to suggest that this theory is seriously flawed, not least the fact that recently falling temperatures were not predicted by any of those computer models on which the advocates of global warming rest their beliefs.

From the comment section of that excellent Booker column I linked to above, I feel I must quote this excellent comment, full of wisdom and rationalism:

I cant help nut laff every time one of our budding "scientists" harps on about "peer review" as if it were the be all and end all. galileo was "peer reviewed" and designated as wrong. so much for his peers. peer review often equates to one semi trained chimpanzee patting another chimpanzee on the back and saying well done you have accurately stuck within the accepted norms of the text books you cribbed from. scientists? dont make me laff.

I honestly believe we should consider Mr Booker for a Blog Pullitzer. Not only is he virtually the only serious journalist in the UK, [the only other being the brave Melanie Phillips] who has the courage to stand up against the ovine stampede of the Mainstream press on the Global Warming issue, he has also revealed that the scare about White Asbestos is nothing but another scaremongering moneymaking scam, this time by the Health and Safety Nazis. Taking on not only the politically correct establishment but also the chenmistry textbooks themselves by revealing that White Asbestos is in fact ......... talcum powder!. Yep, the two are chemically identical.Think of the time and effort we could have saved .....

Another signpost of blog science (imo the only way forward in today's increasingly socialist world): science can be accomplished by anyone interested, irrespective of "qualifications" or back-scratching recommendation. Over at WUWT today, commenter Steve Fitzpatrick offers, out of the clear blue, to help advance the cause:

"Anthony,Off topic. I would like you to offer you a guest post. How would I go about this?"

At least, I think that's watt he's asking - the extra "you" makes things a bit hinky, as Watts would say. But regardless, it's just a simple request, nothing more needed to push the science back into the right hands. With WUWT's high quality control standards, how can we fail?

You people have got to be kidding me! Do you really take Watts seriously?? Here's his reply to a comment earlier today:

"GISTEMP gets cited worldwide, often by news organizations and people that really don’t understand the concept of anomaly and base periods, and thus to change it to reflect proper base period reporting would cause the slope of the GISTEMP graph to drop, and look “less alarming”. – Anthony"

Let's examine that quote, shall we? "People that [sic] don't understand the concept of anomaly" - like Watts himself! Even Phil above admits that Watts is wrong. Then, as if Watts hadn't embarrassed himself enough, he goes on to say that if GISTEMP "updated" their base period, "the slope of the GISTEMP graph" would "drop" - talk about not comprehending anomalies! You guys can't seriously think that he's doing science!

Cut-n-Paste said... "I must admit I've always been suspicious of the peer review system. After all, Monckton is a hereditary peer, isn't he? And he's never been asked to review for a single major journal".

It's a quirk of the feudal system Cut-n-Paste, going all the way back to Magna Carton.Hereditary peers are only allowed to review scientific papers they've inherited.Don't ask me why.

You're so right, Cave Troll, we do not seriously think Professor Watts is doing 'science'. Wot Watts is doing qualifies as 'Blog Science'> He is, in effect, a 'meta-scientist'. If you have still failed to grasp the distinction, and indeed which is superior, by now I can only suggest you go back and re-read Inferno's enlightened posts and the commentary thereunder.

Blog Science is all about asking the right questions and AW, with laserlike judgement, has cut through to the essence of the question with this one...

The real question is, which of these is the correct global temperature anomaly for April ?:

I'm sure that what Watts means when he says that changing the base line can cause the slope to drop, is that the slope of the base line affects how the slop of the anomaly appears.

Those tricksy nasty climate "scientists" surely use a base line that slopes downwards (or should it be upwards? My head hurtss) thereby making it appear as if the anomaly has an upward slope while it is actually flat or even downward (towards a new ice age).

You're just jealous of WUWT and the traffic it generates. Anthony Watts will be remembered as one of the heroes whop stood up for liberty and prevented the global catastrophe of the AGW Tax & Trick SCAM!

It's not that we're jealous of Watts' traffic - we're a select group and guard entry to the community carefully. (Speaking of which, Summer, where art thou?)

Although I have to hand it to WUWT's commenters for clear statements of outside-the-boxplot thinking. Just a few days ago, commenter April Coggins discussed the new BS (Blog Science):

"See, I consider anything I post [at WUWT] to be published and open to peer review. Perhaps that’s simplistic but I consider it to be far more honest and open than the method of publishing and peer review I see in current scientific publications. Does it not bother you are placing political popularity above actual data?"

It never, ever would have occurred to me to make such a clear and revolutionary statement about peer review. Hats off to WUWT.

Now that's usin' yer noggin April Coggins!! It is not for no reason that the message says "Your comment has been published" when you post something on this site. Far more honest and open, and faster too, than your so called "peer-reviewed" nonsense. The beauty of blog science is that everybody is a scientist. Far more inclusive.

Let me be clear - I am confident that Anthony Watts will indeed be remembered, however I think you'll find that if you extrapolate the recent short term trends in traffic stats to the two sites you find the DenialDep will overtake WUWT in the near future based on current trends and adjusted for Time of Observation bias, of course.

One of the things Prof Watt's blog will be remembered for is the rhetorical question headline e.g. Climate Fraud at University of Albany?. You see how clever that is? Allowing an accusation to be suggested but not explicitly made. Another example might be :Does Anthony Watts secretly believe all those who believe in the reality of AGW are Nazis?.

Remember this flight of fancy where a WUWT commenter pictured the Director of the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studes wearing a little black moustache & a swept down fringe, thumping the podium & ranting that he’ll give us the world, free of evil oil, coal, gas. . ?

Interestingly, I was browsing though the excellent open letter from Chris [to his friends] Monckton the other day when the figures on Page 6 captioned Bias over time caught my eye. Chris is grateful to Dr. Anthony Watts for making these graphs public. (anyone know the title of Dr Watts' PhD thesis btw?).

But did Dr Watts author these graphs? Well, here they are in handy blink comparator form on the 'Science Blog of the Year' in which Dr Watts gives a hat-tip to 'Zapruder'. Unusually, Dr Watts is coy about providing good linkage, but a minute with Google locates the source. And what a brilliant source it is! It is a Dutch site zapruder.nl. [Readers of a sensitive disposition, Summer Flower I am thinking of you, may prefer not to follow the link, those that do may well decide to clear their browser history afterwards] There, nestling amongst the posts on 'Nieuwe Wereld Orde' and '9/11 truth' is the source of Monckton's and Dr Watt's graphic. Also, this tasteful cartoonTo my knowledge, Dr Watts has never publicly denied that he believes AGW advocates to be Nazis. One wonders why that may be. In the climate realism movement we must be aware that our opponents may at any time challenge our sources and data. Therefore I think we should make a fraternal freedom of information request to Dr Watts and Viscount Monckton, asking ...

1. Did they contact the originators of the Zapruder website to establish the provenance of the graphic? We must see transcripts of any and all communications whether spoken, written, analogue or digital with the Zapruder crew. Where are the data behind the graphic archived? Have the data been independently audited?

2. Who funds Zapruder? We require audited accounts for the last three years, the names and bona fides of all the company Directors, their immediate relatives and pets.

Failure to comply will immediately and possibly fatally, damage the credibility of the climate truth movement, which of course we all passionately support, and so an early response is vital. Inferno, perhaps you could bring your considerable influence to bear?

Phil,The Googling Monkeys have determined that Dr. Wassup's PhD (now known as Piled higher and Deeper) was in BS (Blog Science). As our host Inferno has pointed out, the New Paradigm of BS has no need for "textbooks". Indeed, the efficiencies in information distribution made possible by the wonders of the Internets have eliminated the time-wasting activities of "courses", "exams" and "theses". Since BS is fully market-driven, truth is easily determined by counting web page hits. After all, if a blog was not publishing true information, people would immediately stop reading it.

Phil, That Zapruder source is a bit scary - but I have faith in Prof. Watts. I'm sure he has thoroughly audited the data behind the graph, but he just doesn't know the source. That would make sense to me.

Even if he does know the source, we Blog Scientists know that minor details like this don't matter; it's the bigger picture that Watts gets right.

A brand new argument emerged at WUWT in today's comments, never before seen on any blog (and, it goes without saying, in any "peer-reviewed" sciencey journal). Jack Simmons quotes Ken Rattie, CEO of Questar natural gas:

"water vapor is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. [The media now calls CO2 a “pollutant”. If CO2 is a “pollutant” then water vapor is also a “pollutant” – that’s absurd, but I digress.]"

Now there's an absolutely luminous argument - why don't we have top-drawer minds like that among climate scientists? And I didn't realize that "the media" were the ones who called CO2 a pollutant - somehow I had the impression it was the EPA. Anyway, Fredierick Michael responds:

"That is one hell of a strong point — and I hadn’t thought of it. Thanks for the ammo."

Just think of the devestation we blogger-peers are wreaking on climate "science" with each new post! I practically sends chills up my spine!

Didn't they recently discover some chemical with Nitrogen in it that is 10,000 times stronger a greenhouse gas than Co2? And Nitrogen is 80% of the atmosphere, so wouldn't this chemical totally blow away any so called CO2 effect?

Doctor Roy Spencer did a thorough study of the relative importance of CO2 relative to other gases in the atmosphere, complete with graphs and everything. Actually, Inferno did a similarly thorough analysis using similar methods but I believe a much clearer presentation showing the insignificance of CO2 -- I only mention the doctor because I know some people are suckers for credentials (but then those people are a lost cause anyway) so at the very least Inferno is not alone in making this point.

Bottom line is, if Nitrogen has even 1% the impact on climate that CO2 has, it blows CO2 out of the water, or atmosphere as the case may be.

That Doctor Spencer's thorough study never was published in a high-class scientific journal only proves how efficient the AGW fascist censorship is. Those graphs should be on the front page of Nature or National Geographic!

As an avid follower of George Monbiot's pleas on deaf ears which appear periodically in the UK's Guardian newspaper, I was struck by the succinctness of this comment.

"as a child in the 70's i remember being terrified by the scientific consensus reported in all the journals of the day that within 30 years we would all be engulfed by a new ice age.

i'm not particularly chilly.

many of the liars from the 70's are the same cassandras now, just more senior and of course shameless in their reversal.

chase the funding....not the truthlook at some data

antartic ice shelf has increased over the last 5 years

global temperatures have decreased over the last 7 years

pen had to abandon his measurements because it was too cold for his instruments!

marxists having seen the collapse of their dreams in every developed society since the collapse of the wall have simply refocused.

anyone who follows them should at least be honest enough to admit they have left science behind, for the religion of marxism".

Which is like so wow and to the point that it momentarily eclipsed my fave reply whenever Monbiot posts his warmist, bed-wetting drivel, viz;"Pity those crystal balls(climate models)can't tell me whether it will rain on Friday, got a barbecue planned".

which always makes me larf, even when it re-appears in response to a "climate change" column from a variety of poster identities, over a period of months.

Ive not been able to post for a while coz my 'puter woz attacked by Nazis. Does anyone know a good anti-Nazi worm program? I kept getting rude pictures when I tried to read this sight. In the end my boyfreind said I had to reboot.

Ive been thinking about greenhouses and I think they cant be a problem otherwise they wouldnt still be selling them and people who already had them would have to take them down.

Its interesting to learn there are doctors looking into this. My doctor is very nice and I think he spent a long time learning things b4 he woz a doctor.

The greenhouse effect really has nothing to do with greenhouses. There are actually no glass panes covering the entire earth. See this article by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner. The whole idea of a greenhouse effect is just one big politically correct bedwetting back-scratching chimpanzee scam! So you need not fear any more.

But as you come here to learn about the truth I must commend you for your healthy skeptisism and rationality (for a woman). You know, there are more women than men that worries about this fake greenhouse effect. According to Andrew Bolt, this is evidence that both women and the great global warming scare are fundamentally irrational. I couldn't agree more!

Your boyfriend is very wise, as rebooting is known to kill 99% of household computer germs without a doubt.

While it's all very platform dependent and you give no details of your setup, you might also check out installing "free.avg.com" (AntiVergeltungswaffeGeschichte) which includes an anti-fascist plug-in by default.

Regarding greenhouse effect, I believe this may be an example of what is called 'metaphorical' (i.e. imaginary).

I think the warmists are scared that with the ending of the greenhouse monopoly which was previously only available to elitists who could afford the required amount of glass, tomato crops will be there for the taking of anybody who wants to grow them in God's free garden air.

Among his many other crimes, we can add tomato oppressor to Algore's resume.

Our hero, the Blog Doctor, Steve Goddard has just disseminated this..The flaw in The Guardian’s logic is a failure to acknowledge that Glasgow needs a consistent power supply 24×7x365.There are two issues here: firstly we need to establish a subcommittee to determine the number of (a) weeks in a year, and (b) the number of days in a week. Assuming they report back that the answers are

(a) 52 and(b) 7

then we need to somehow re-establish the credibility of Prof Goddard in particular and Blog Science in general. The narrow-minded argument will be that peer-review would have prevented such a monumental cockup being presented to the general public.

Feeling a bit depressed now about the value of publishing BS, any ideas?

Phil, that's a sharp eye you have, but perhaps your worries are misplaced. After all would Goddard - at the BSV (Blog Science Vanguard) - really use so imprecise a figure as 365 for days in a year? In his previous peer-reviewed posts, he has been nothing if not meticulous about analysis, and I'm sure he would have used the more accurate figure 365 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes, and 12 seconds (currently, and steadily increasing). He is after all an expert in time series analysis.

No, he must have been referring to something else with the expression 24x7x365. But what? Perhaps it's a reference to the number of kilowatts needed in Glasgow? The collective number of missed shots by the Glasgow Rangers? No, that can't be it - it must be something of enormous significance. Any other ideas?

Hmmm, apparently it just got harder for Anthony Watts to complain about peer review, for he is now a peer himself. In the Goddard post (with the cryptic 24x7x365 expression), someone named Adolfo Giurfa comments:

"Dress up Lord Anthony, Knight of WUWT"

Funny how the liberal media didn't report His Lordship's new status...

Adolfo continues his verse by enjoining Watts to "Firmly hold your steel spear," which I'm sure is not phallic. I believe it was Freud who said "Sometimes a steel spear is just a cigar." Or was that "just a thermometer?" It's late and I can't recall.

Phew, the Dr was actually referring to the phrase 24/7/365, which means 'always on'. What a fool I have been. So the article, which pours scorn on the ridiculous proposal by The Guardian that a large wind farm could power all of Glasgow all of the time with no base load backup, spinning reserve etc is robust.

Doctor Spencer is done with the peer reviewed journals. All groupthink, must march in lockstep, any dissenter gets called nasty things and shouted down. Fortunately he has fully embraced blog science over the past year, see here and here. Now if only he would use his blog to give us more of his clear-headed thinking on evolution as well. I don't know of anyone related to any monkeys, save possibly Al Gore. Ahh, but that is off topic for this blog.

My fellow deniers, another day dawns and brings with it another nail in the coffin of AGW, deftly hammered home by another Blog Scientist. In this case a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Aerospace, ex NASA Langley chap and author of 90 academic papers, for those shallow enough to be impressed by these baubles. He posts at The Air Vent Disproving The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Problem.

Eschewing the peer-reviewed literature as source material in favour of articles from Christopher Booker, World Climate Report [edited by Pat Michaels who knows a thing or two about scientific integrity, being the source of much of Michael Chrichton's meticulous research] and papers hosted by the Frontiers of Freedom. Dr Weinstein nails the various AGW claims and predictions that have like, totally failed to transpire.

Challenged about the non-peer-reviewed nature of WCR and FF, here is the Doctor's reply [Comment 28],

I don’t have any idea who the Frontier Foundation and World Climate Report areJust stop and consider the ramifications for a moment. I fear Viscount Monckton may have a rival in the field of lordly, aristocratic disdain. What Dr Weinstein is actually saying here is that the source does not matter, as soon as I have assimilated the science I forget about where I got my information from.

This is about as far as you can get from the stuffy 'evidence laden' peer review science that has led us down the garden path to bedwetting AGW so-called crisis. I feel we may be witnessing a key moment in the evolution of Blog Science.

So in future, don't bother giving us your peer-reviewed references and citations, you AGW sheep - we'll just forget them minutes later!

Dr Weinstein wrote "However, the peer review process is broken on the subject of AGW (and is not well in many other areas also). For this reason, I just reviewed the literature and blogs and wrote several short white papers of my analysis for discussion on blog use only".

This is surely the eloquently expressed essence of the direction the new bog science will take, and completely over warmist “John Phillips” (probably a Jim Hockeysticks pseudonym) head.Ignoring the cassandritic uncertainties and tedious double and triple checking of stuffy academic details, whilst piggy-backing on corporate funding to data mine astroturf sites to provide as full and rounded an appreciation of the issues in as fast and user friendly ways as are possible with today’s busy 24/7/365 lifestyle, is the new paradigm.

Dr Weinstein wrote "This subject has become a political issue, and is so heavily biased that many good papers have been and are being rejected by many publications due to coming to an unacceptable conclusion according to their bias".

This is just so true, as I’ve learned from personal experience.

I recall wandering home early one morning shortly after dawn and, passing IPCC HQ, noticed the side gate was unlocked. Being curious by nature, I nonchalantly strolled in and made my way to the rear of the building. Once round the corner and out of site from the street, I noticed line after line of dumpster skips, many of them filled to overflowing. On closer examination I discovered reams and reams of scientific papers bundled up into sheafs marked with big red letters saying things like “marginal – further investigation required”, “unacceptable”, “bury”, “too close to the truth”, and “f*ck off“ etc.

It was only after reading Dr Weinstein’s article and comments that the significance dawned on me.I’m just glad that somehow all those papers are being filtered through someone of Dr. Weinstein’s calibre beforehand so that he can attest to how good they were. I use the past tense because something was smoking and smouldering in oil drums nearby and not being an optimist, I don’t think it was hot dogs.

Dr Weinstein wrote "Even then, many new papers are coming out that slowly are shifting the weight of the position against AGW".

Dr Weinstein most likely guesses that now the word is out, any future papers submitted that are treated beforehand with ordinary household talc won’t be quite so easy to ‘disappear’ and their self-evident common sense will be another nail to spike the warmist’s guns. Hurrah!

Dr Weinstein wrote "If you can’t accept facts stuck in your face because they have not been blessed by Gore, that is your loss".

If it had been me, I would have just abbreviated that whole sentence to ”in your face Gore!” (probaly in caps and just left it at that. But presumably that’s why Dr W is the toast of aerospace engineers and I just know how to make toast.

In the spirit of egalitarian blog science though, I did send him a design for a spaceship I’ve been working on for a few years now.

Inferno - I know it has been done elesewhere but I reaaly think a quote of the week feature would help to get the message across in a punchy, edgy new media-savvy Web 2.0 kinda way, essential if we are to get down with the kids and counteract the GorEcoFascist tendency that is even now snapping at the heels of our new paradigm.

This week I propose

Ignoring the cassandritic uncertainties and tedious double and triple checking of stuffy academic details, whilst piggy-backing on corporate funding to data mine astroturf sites to provide as full and rounded an appreciation of the issues in as fast and user friendly ways as are possible with today’s busy 24/7/365 lifestyle, is the new paradigm.from chek. Words to live by.

Our hero, the Blog Doctor, Steve Goddard has just disseminated this..The flaw in The Guardian’s logic is a failure to acknowledge that Glasgow needs a consistent power supply 24×7x365.There are two issues here: firstly we need to establish a subcommittee to determine the number of (a) weeks in a year, and (b) the number of days in a week. Assuming they report back that the answers are

(a) 52 and(b) 7

then we need to somehow re-establish the credibility of Prof Goddard in particular and Blog Science in general. The narrow-minded argument will be that peer-review would have prevented such a monumental cockup being presented to the general public.

Feeling a bit depressed now about the value of publishing BS, any ideas?"

Perhaps the extra factor of 7 comes from the fact that the heroic blog scientists's name is actually Dr. Steve Doggard, and AGW causes dyslexia in addition to the vapors.

My fellow deniers, we have our quote of the week, from Dr Steve Goddard. The doctor has sparked off a controversy over on WUWT by claiming that

How cold is it in Antarctica? According to Weather Underground, Vostok, Antarctica is forecast to reach -113F on Friday. That is four degrees below the freezing point of CO2 and would cause dry (CO2) ice to freeze directly out of the air.

Various know-nothing bedwetters took issue with this nugget of Blog Science, causing the Doctor [late in the evening in his timezone, possibly after a wee celebration of another incisive post] to shut down further dissent thus ...

Below the freezing point of a gas, it can exist as a solid. In the winter, we see the transition from gas to solid as frost. Frost occurs even at extremely low humidities.

There are other things going on as well. The ice may be getting hit by photons or other energetic particles which cause them to convert back to gas. This can be seen when the ice is exposed to sun or wind, even on a very cold day. The higher the humidity, the greater the tendency for water molecules to form ice. This phenomenon is not covered by phase diagrams, which simply show the preferred state at a given ambient temperature and pressure.

At -113F and 1atm, that state would be solid for CO2.

Whack! Socko! Take that, warmists. I suggest we all pile over to WUWT and commend the Doctor on his clear exposition of phase transitions.

Oh No! As you were, people. Professor Anthony Watts has weighed into the argument....

At this point, after doing research of my own, including a telephone call to a local expert on compressed gases (since I am no expert in that field) and reading comments, particularly that of George E. Smith which answered the question in my mind of why we could have solid to gas phase transition of CO2 (sublimation) but not the other way around (at least at -113F) I’m ready to call this myth of CO2 “snow” condensing from the free atmosphere at the south pole at -113F as transitioning from “plausible” to “busted”.

As we know a Blog Professor outranks a Blog Doctor, and so we must sadly conclude that the original claim is .....

Maybe Inferno realizes that satire can't beat the real thing. Along with the hilarious thread pointed to by Phil above, we have this statement on another thread:

"When the NOAA official global energy balance budget that they plot sets the solar incoming radiation at 1366 or so W/m^2, instead of a fictitious 342; and adjusts all the other parametrizations as well; then maybe I’ll pay some attention to ccomputer models."

In other words, they're still waiting for NOAA to admit that the earth is flat, not round!

Everyone please remember that Inferno has been fighting these mongrol horde wed-betting thermal head cases almost single handedly for months on end here. He's g Gotta recharge the ol' batteries, and I imagine he's probably soaking up some rays in the tropics somewhere, which would be a very good choice, given that the impending ice age from the dying sun and Al Gore-led commie carbon policies is going to make tropical paradises completely obsolete in the very near future.

Now we all know that the Soros-subsidised, bedwetting Nazis who promote AGW have nothing but ad hominem arguments to their name. Everyone knows that they scuttle away terrified, tails between their legs when challenged to serious debate, in the sure knowledge that they would be soundly trounced by the intellectual firepower of the likes of the two Christophers - Booker and Monckton. It is also common knowledge that AGW-promoting weblogs routinely and ruthlessly delete any hint of a dissenting opinion made in comments, just as the Nazis burned books. It is said that a large percentage of internet traffic is the gigabytes of deleted comments being dispatched to the troll bin by Gavin and his cronies at RealClimate.

But a site I have just encountered has the solution. RC Rejects is a site where comments snuffed out by Schmidt, Mann and Co may get the oxygen of publicity. Since January it has accumulated literally dozens of such comments, some by people other than the blog owner, Mr RCRejects himself. Here are a collection of his opening remarks to various posts which demonstrate his commendable modesty

"Not a lot of activity last week – two posts only, one from us, another from herbert stencil.""Quite a bit more activity last week, and that is reflected in the site stats as well – quite a few visits. 16 posts, but most of those were put up by me""We had 15 posts last week – most were posted by me, copied from other blogs. However, we had posts from Herbert Stencil and Vernon as well (thanks guys!).""Last week was a relatively quiet week for us. Only two independent posters (thanks guys). ""Things have been pretty quiet while I have been away. ""Things have been pretty quiet here.""Things have been pretty quiet here. Nevertheless, I plan to keep the site open in order to fulfil its primary function – to act as a repository for comments rejected over at RC."

How can we help? Well, if we start to insert nuggets of established Blog Science into comments at RealClimate, they will of course be zapped, be sure to keep a copy of your post and repost it at RCRejects, this will serve the twin aims of exposing both the strength of our arguments and the vicous censorship in place at RealClimate.

Here are some proposed topics ...

CO2 rises after temperature in the historical record.The Romans grew grapes and made wine in the North of England, [insert joke about 4x4 chariots!]The Vikings farmed dates and camels in Greenland, in near-desert conditions.over 31,000 climate scientists have signed the Oregon Petition proving there is no concensus.The current rapid global cooling and imminent ice age are already being felt in falling crop yields, we need more CO2, not less!

Those are all good suggestions in theory, in the same way as Prof Wattsup's expeditions have exposed that once rural weather stations had over time been incorporated into iron smelters, blast furnaces and the uninhabited ends of jet engine test sheds.

But I fear it's all over the heads and dry, dry, dry as dust (or the bygone deserts of Greenland if you prefer) to the average Joe.

What is needed imho is more hard hitting sciencey-flavoured stuff, but that gets to the heart of the matter in a way that warmists cannot deny. Take this shining example, for example:

"I don’t want to get too technical, but what they seem to be saying is that the more solar activity there is, the warmer the Earth gets. Um, how counterintuitive can you get?

As Al Gore and other people who stand to make a lot of money from global warming scare tactics will tell you, “the science is settled.” Unless you drive a hybrid, stumble around in the dark at night, and only eat things you find in your yard, you’re killing the planet. So I don’t see what a big fat ball of hot gas way up in the sky has to do with anything. But enough about Gore in his private jet".http://deceiver.com/2009/06/05/wait-the-sun-can-make-things-warmer/

Even arch Gore apologist Tim Lamboid on his Dilbert blog could not refute (whilst pretending to acknowledge it). Science with a sassy punch, or what? Al Gore is fuh-aah-tuh.

No, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find Inferno is even now preparing a paper with a footnoted and full BMI analysis of Herr Gore and other AGW enablers.

Re: C'n'P - regrettably no photos. You must remember that at the time cellphones /mobile phones were the size of army walky-talkies at the Battle of the Bulge, and instant pictures entailed being followed around by a van full of developing fluid. And besides, like in those old movies, there is no longer any trace or evidence that the IPCC ever even had premises in Grimsby.

On a completely different but seriously related note, allow me to post a link to the best and clearest explanation of the current global financial crisis I've yet had explained to me by anyone.http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n10/lanc01_.html

...Prof Wattsup's expeditions have exposed that once rural weather stations had over time been incorporated into iron smelters, blast furnaces and the uninhabited ends of jet engine test sheds.

Good point. All three of which are of course child's play compared to the ass end of an air conditioner, the cumulative number of which are largely responsible for whatever global warming there is (which isn't much).

"Good point. All three of which are of course child's play compared to the ass end of an air conditioner, the cumulative number of which are largely responsible for whatever global warming there is (which isn't much)".

I also think it's very likely something similar is going on with those high arctic temps as well.If you were the poor klutz sent out on deck in the cold with the thermometer for 10 mins, what would you do?I know what I'd do.Go stand by the radiator outlet where it's not so friggin' cold, that's what.

C'mon, we, those of us battling on the internet to advance science, need the kind of quality blog science Denial Depot provides. We can't leave the re writing of blog science just to Professor Watts - he's undoubtedly brilliant but he can't revolutionise all blog science (plus government and society) on his own.

"[Denial Depot]'s NOT dying - it's just resting due to it bein' tired and shagged out following a prolonged bout of science blogging."

Bah. It is a despicable notion that the dormant several weeks here at Double-D is simply an expected natural variation in the activity of this shining star of Blog Science. It is in fact a slap in the face of Blog Science to fail to recognize that this Inferno Minimum (during which time millions have died) is directly caused by humans, or at least as close to humans as fearmongering, Gore-loving, pine-straw-wetting, warmist trolls are. As made clear by my personal feelings and presumably all the other evidence, they have no doubt conspired in some worldwide effort to squelch this purveyor of climate truth. Anyone who wants to hand-wave an explanation that does not account for the dominant human influence on our most troubling situation here is woefully out of touch.

I have been praying that a Loving Heavenly Father would have mercy on mankind and let us freeze our asses off for a while, just to show modern man that, the Creator is in control of all things, not little ole' us.

Well Inferno, that is all true, but It's 2010 now and things have changed drastically since your post was first uploaded. Check spaceweather.com archives for Dec. 29, 2009, and Jan. 6, 2010. In fact, I've been watching new images from sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/data.html very closely lately and I've witnessed at least 5 CME's (coronal mass ejection's) since the one back in Dec. 29, 2009. So Inferno, where exactly have you been getting your information. I'm not exactly saying you were wrong, but though we were having a very long solar minimum scientists have been predicting a massive solar maximum to occur at or around 2009 to 2012. Not too long ago astro-physicist Michio Kaku went public on fox news saying that NASA warns of super solar storm in 2012. www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_TzIUlaQok An update to this video was added recently by the uploader saying NASA has pushed the 2012 due date back a year to 2013. Go figure. At least now we do have some proof of this allegations possibly coming into realism courtesy of SOHO.

Really trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading..World of Warcraft

Hardy clothing have come to be those of a great stylist who put together his work in the pop culture of today. So you won't at all be surprised that hardy shirts known for his tattoo designs created a ED Hardy Shoes for Christian Audigier embellishing many of the garments with rhinestone, gold or prints. Christian Audigier also ought to be given credit as he saw promise in hardy shirt and invited him to create his own line of clothes with tattoo art merged with the regular garments.

Thank you for your post, I look for such article along time,today i find it finally.this post give me lots of advise it is very useful for me .i will pay more attention to you ,i hope you can go on posting more such post, i will support you all the time. May be you are Sports fans? Do you like Designer Handbags these have the high quality,low price,professional service,Just For You if you like.Thank you again for writing this article!

Howdy!, Very attention-grabbing angle, we had been talking about the identical factor at work and located your web site very stimulating. So just had to com-ment an enormous thank you for all of your effort. Please keep up the nice work your doing!

It depends what you mean by dying - in one sense all of are dying from the minute we are born. The sun is about half way through its "useful" life. It has another 3 to 5 billion years before it starts to "go wrong" as we would see it. We need it as the basic mould treatment.

Happened across your post while searching via yahoo. I study the 1st paragraph and its wonderful! I do not have time to finish it now, but I have bookmarked your web page and will read the rest tonight. : )

Many theories talk about what to expect for 2012, I think most of us are wandering what is really going to happen, almost all of the ancient cultures knew about it, recorded it for us to be ready for it.

Yeah, many do talk about what to expect for 2012. The biggest one is a New World Odor brought to you by the Global Banksters and their Federal Reserve, U.N. and Congress that's too chicken hearted to stand up to this tyranny...!!! It's called the 4th Reich. Welcome to the New World Order, from the same folks that screwed up the old one...!!!

Let`s write that letter we thought of writing "one of these days Tibia Gold, just because someone doesn't love you the way you want them to, doesn't mean they don't love you with all they have Tibia coins, don't waste your time on a man/woman, who isn't willing to waste their time on you sro gold.

The past is gone and static. Nothing we can do will change it.scarlet blade gold, the future is before us and dynamic. Everything we do will affect it rs gold, You laugh at mescarlet blade gold for being different , but I laugh at you for being the same.

A tiny gratefulness cheap fifa 14 coins can give us a lasting positive mood, which requires our consciousness fifa 14 coins and gratefulness. Then with a heart of gratefulness, everything turns out to be fifa 14 coins gorgeous.

About

Welcome to the most factual and sincere climate science blog on the internet. Winner of multiple anonymous awards.

I am certainly not afraid to be called a climate denier, in fact I embrace the term denier as medal of honor, once bestowed upon Galileo and lately upon me. That is why this blog is called Denial Depot - serving up all your denial needs.

I stand unimpressed by "textbooks", "peer review journals" and so-called "facts". There are no facts, just dissenting opinion.

I believe the day will come when all science is done on blogs, because us bloggers are natural skeptics, refusing to believe the Official Story handed out by the government. When so-called "experts" in their "peer reviewed journals" say one thing, we dare the impossible and find an imaginative justification to believe the complete opposite.